These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
167 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 29631992)
1. The Validity of Online Patient Ratings of Physicians: Analysis of Physician Peer Reviews and Patient Ratings. McGrath RJ; Priestley JL; Zhou Y; Culligan PJ Interact J Med Res; 2018 Apr; 7(1):e8. PubMed ID: 29631992 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. The Voice of Chinese Health Consumers: A Text Mining Approach to Web-Based Physician Reviews. Hao H; Zhang K J Med Internet Res; 2016 May; 18(5):e108. PubMed ID: 27165558 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. The development of online doctor reviews in China: an analysis of the largest online doctor review website in China. Hao H J Med Internet Res; 2015 Jun; 17(6):e134. PubMed ID: 26032933 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. A Comparison of Online Physician Ratings and Internal Patient-Submitted Ratings from a Large Healthcare System. Okike K; Uhr NR; Shin SYM; Xie KC; Kim CY; Funahashi TT; Kanter MH J Gen Intern Med; 2019 Nov; 34(11):2575-2579. PubMed ID: 31531811 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Online physician ratings fail to predict actual performance on measures of quality, value, and peer review. Daskivich TJ; Houman J; Fuller G; Black JT; Kim HL; Spiegel B J Am Med Inform Assoc; 2018 Apr; 25(4):401-407. PubMed ID: 29025145 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. [Do online ratings reflect structural differences in healthcare? The example of German physician-rating websites]. Meszmer N; Jaegers L; Schöffski O; Emmert M Z Evid Fortbild Qual Gesundhwes; 2018 Apr; 131-132():73-80. PubMed ID: 29331281 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Examining the Role of Physician Characteristics in Web-Based Verified Primary Care Physician Reviews: Observational Study. Sehgal NKR; Rader B; Brownstein JS J Med Internet Res; 2024 Jul; 26():e51672. PubMed ID: 39074363 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Gender, Soft Skills, and Patient Experience in Online Physician Reviews: A Large-Scale Text Analysis. Dunivin Z; Zadunayski L; Baskota U; Siek K; Mankoff J J Med Internet Res; 2020 Jul; 22(7):e14455. PubMed ID: 32729844 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Web-Based Physician Ratings for California Physicians on Probation. Murphy GP; Awad MA; Osterberg EC; Gaither TW; Chumnarnsongkhroh T; Washington SL; Breyer BN J Med Internet Res; 2017 Aug; 19(8):e254. PubMed ID: 28830852 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Physicians' Earnings Do Not Affect Their Online Ratings. Haffey SC; Hopman WM; Leveridge MJ Front Public Health; 2020; 8():300. PubMed ID: 32733838 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. The impact of social media presence, age, and patient reported wait times on physician review websites for sports medicine surgeons. Sama AJ; Matichak DP; Schiller NC; Li DJ; Donnally CJ; Damodar D; Cole BJ J Clin Orthop Trauma; 2021 Oct; 21():101502. PubMed ID: 34350098 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Scope, Breadth, and Differences in Online Physician Ratings Related to Geography, Specialty, and Year: Observational Retrospective Study. Liu JJ; Matelski JJ; Bell CM J Med Internet Res; 2018 Mar; 20(3):e76. PubMed ID: 29514775 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. A cross-sectional study assessing the association between online ratings and structural and quality of care measures: results from two German physician rating websites. Emmert M; Adelhardt T; Sander U; Wambach V; Lindenthal J BMC Health Serv Res; 2015 Sep; 15():414. PubMed ID: 26404452 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Chronic Pain Practices: An Evaluation of Positive and Negative Online Patient Reviews. Orhurhu MS; Salisu B; Sottosanti E; Abimbola N; Urits I; Jones M; Viswanath O; Kaye AD; Simopoulos T; Orhurhu V Pain Physician; 2019 Sep; 22(5):E477-E486. PubMed ID: 31561660 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. A changing landscape of physician quality reporting: analysis of patients' online ratings of their physicians over a 5-year period. Gao GG; McCullough JS; Agarwal R; Jha AK J Med Internet Res; 2012 Feb; 14(1):e38. PubMed ID: 22366336 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Understanding Your Online Ratings: A Methodological Analysis Using Urogynecologists in the United States. Huber SA; Priestley J; Kasabwala K; Gadidov B; Culligan P Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg; 2019; 25(2):193-197. PubMed ID: 30807427 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. How social media, training, and demographics influence online reviews across three leading review websites for spine surgeons. Donnally CJ; Li DJ; Maguire JA; Roth ES; Barker GP; McCormick JR; Rush AJ; Lebwohl NH Spine J; 2018 Nov; 18(11):2081-2090. PubMed ID: 29709552 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Online doctor reviews: do they track surgeon volume, a proxy for quality of care? Segal J; Sacopulos M; Sheets V; Thurston I; Brooks K; Puccia R J Med Internet Res; 2012 Apr; 14(2):e50. PubMed ID: 22491423 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. What Do Patients Think About Their Radiation Oncologists? An Assessment of Online Patient Reviews on Healthgrades. Prabhu AV; Randhawa S; Clump D; Heron DE; Beriwal S Cureus; 2018 Feb; 10(2):e2165. PubMed ID: 29644154 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]